nitromefandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:Adding Template:Citation Needed for your content you add yourself
Should it be acceptable to add Template:Citation needed to something you add yourself? Because I've noticed that some users have been adding content to pages, then on their own sentences, they add Template:Citation needed. Now, although they added this because they don't want to add the citation themselves (or don't know how to), I think edits that have "Citation Needed" on them, unless the citation can be easily found, that the sentence that has "Citation Needed" on them should be removed. This is because, if someone wants to add the citation, they usually are unable to because they don't know where to look. Although most of this content is on the Nitrome blog, some of it is on other websites or completely unverifiable. What I am suggesting is that, people who write down sentences or content, and add a citation needed to it, these sentences/content be removed. Discuss. Also, people who have added citation needed to their own content, please don't think you did anything wrong by doing this. -- 01:41, January 29, 2014 (UTC) :Hm, I see this one from your point of view, and I'm going to have to agree. However, maybe we could also first ask the user on their talk page where they got their information from before removing the sentence. 01:52, January 29, 2014 (UTC) :::I agree with Emite's idea of asking the user prior to deleting the information. 01:56, January 29, 2014 (UTC) ::::@Emite: Sure, that could be done. -- 02:04, January 29, 2014 (UTC) :::::I agree with asking the user as well. If they are unable to provide a source, then that content should be removed. -- 20:02, January 29, 2014 (UTC) The situation should be based on the user's intentions and not so much the act of just putting the template on. I've used Cn on content I've added myself because I knew the source was present, but I didn't know how to locate and link it. Not everyone adds the template just because they want to get away with inserting false information, and I don't agree with the idea of flat out removing content just because a user put a Cn next to a sentence they added. I think it needs to be more of a situation-by-situation approach. First off, if they add it, investigate the claim and see if you can find a source to support it or at least clarify within the article (eg. the level that supports the statement). If you know straight off the bat that the claim is not true (a reliable source contradicts it) or it is harmful, remove it. If not, keep the template and see if a source can be pinpointed. Move sections with Cn to the talk page if it really bothers you or, like most of you said, ask the user who added the text, but I strongly oppose removing content a user has added along with Cn just because they added it. 05:04, January 30, 2014 (UTC)